
Pass ^HH5 
Book r 'A v 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/discussionofcampOOmary 



/■' 



DISCUSSION 



OP THE 



Campbell Oyster Culture Bill 



AS AMENDED BY THE 



PRICE OYSTER PLAN 



PROVIDING FOB 



Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars 



ALONG WITH 



Oyster Culture on Barren Bottoms 



Essential Features op the Cahpbell-Pbice Bill. 

1st. Stringent regulations protecting the 215.852 acres of nat- 
ural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the 
Maryland Oyster Survey. 

2d. Provisions for increasing revenues through encouraging 
the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by granting certain privileges 
to oyster planters necessary for the profitable cultivation of 
oysters. 

3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster bars 
through reshelling and cultivation by providing for the equal 
division of the revenue received from oyster planting between a 
"Special Eoad Fund" and a "Fund for the Conservation of Nat- 
ural Oyster Bars." 



Published by the 

MARYLAND SHELL FISH COMMISSION 

February, 19»2. 



■m? 



> Vw *1> \ 



|V\, v y 1 ^ , A "sV c\\ $p Ai e^ 

DISCUSSION 



Campbell Oyster Culture Bill 



AS AMENDED BY THE 



PRICE OYSTER PLAN 



PROVIDING FOR 



Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars 



ALONG WITH 



Oyster Culture on Barren Bottoms 



Essential Features of the Campbell-Price Bill. 

l=t. Stringent regulations protecting the 215.852 acres of nat- 
ural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the 
Maryland Oyster Survey. 

2d. Provisions for increasing revenues through encouraging 
the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by granting certain privileges 
to oyster planters necessary for the profitable cultivation of 
oysters. 

3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster bars 
through reshelling and cultivation by providing for the equal 
division of the revenue received froru oyster planting between a 
"Special Road Fund" and a "Fund for the Conservation of Nat- 
ural Oyster Bars." 



Published by the 

MARYLAND SHELL FISH COMMISSION 

February, J9J2. 



^ 



* 



tf 



\ 

CONTENTS. 

Analysis and Index to the Campbell-Price Bill .... 3 

Present Status of the " Maryland Oyster Question " . . 5 

The Campbell-Price Bill 7 

Discussion of — 

Protection of natural oyster bars 23 

Taking oysters from leased bottoms 17 

Reduction of rentals 11 

Conservation of natural oyster bars 30 

Division of revenue from leased bottoms .... 22 

Increased areas opened for leasing 10 

Collection of fines and rentals for unlawful use of 

barren bottoms 26 

Notes relating to the Development of the Oyster Resources 
of Maryland : 

Cross Reference 32 

Notes .35 

Extracts from printed interviews or public addresses of 
Governor Goldsborough, Senator Campbell, Senator 
Price, Senator Goslin, Senator Milbourne and a 
reprint of a clipping from the Easton Star-Democrat 47 



*<" 



7\ 



ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAMAN 
OYSTER CULTURE LAW OF 1906 AND 
CAMPBELL-PRICE AMENDA- 
TORY BILL OF 1912. 



Hainan Law, 
1906. 



Campbell-Price Bill, 
1912. 



Areas. 
Ten acres permitted 
to be leased by individ- 
uals in county waters ; 
one hundred acres else- 
where. 



$1 



Rentals. 
to $5 per acre in 



sliding scale beginning 
at date of lease. 



Period of Priority oj 
Riylds to Lease. 
Riparian owners four 
months; oystermen six 
months. 

Cultivating and Taking 

Oysters. 
No practical method 
of cultivating or taking 
oysters allowed plant- 
ers on the leased oyster 
farms. 



Protection of Natural 

Oyster Bars. 
No adequate provi- 
sion. 



Areas. 
Thirty acres permitted to be 
leased by individuals in county 
waters; one hundred acres in Tan- 
gier Sound; five hundred acres 
elsewhere. 

Rentals. 
$1 per acre to April 1, 1918, and 
then $1 tu J5 per acre in sliding 
scale. Provision that a report is 
to be made to next Legislature on 
advisability of establishing some 
method of assessing rentals ac- 
cordlng to the value of bottoms. 

Period of Priority of Rights to Lease. 

Riparian owners 30 days; oys- 
termen 80 days. 



Cultivating and Taking Oysters. 

Practical methods permitted for 
taking and cultivating oysters on 
leased oyster farms on week days 
between sunrise and .sunset from 
September 15th to June loth of the 
following year, but notice of such 
intention must be given police offi- 
cials after close of dredging season. 

Protection of Natural Oyster Bars. 

Penalties and protective meas- 
uies are : 

1st. House of Correction three 
months to one year. 

2d. Forfeiture of boatand tackle, 
or fineof $100 to $500. 

3d. Denied the right to take out 
license for three years after convic- 
tion. 

4th. Notice must be given to 
police officials by planters taking 
ousters after close of dredging 
season. 



Section of 
Bill. 



98 
100 
110 



98 



100 
102 



112 



112 
112 A 
116 



ANALYSIS— Continued. 



Hainan Law, 


Campbell-Price Bill, 


Section of 


190C. 


1912. 


Bill. 


Collection of Fines and 


Collection of Fines and Rentals for 




Reyitalsfor Unlawful 


Unlawful Use of Barren Bottoms. 




L'ae of Barren 
Bottoms. 


Penalty of $50 for each offence. 




No adequate provi- 




105 


sion. 




115 A 


Division of Revenue. 


Division of R< w nm . 




All to "Special Road 


Divided equally between a " Spe- 




Fund." 


cial Road Fund " and a " Fuud for 
the Conservation of Natural Oyster 






Bars." 


llts 


Conservation and lie- 


Conservation and Reshelling of 


119 A 


shelling of Natural 


Natural Oyster Bars. 


HOB 


Oyster Bars. 


Provision for use of "Fund for 


119 C 


No provision. 


Conservation of Natural Oyster 


119 D 




Bars" in reshelling and restocking 


119E 




Natural Oyster Bars. 


119 F 



5 



PKESENT STATUS OF THE " MARYLAND OYSTER 

QUESTON." 

Natural Oyster Bars : In compliance with the provisions of 
the Hainan Oyster Culture Law, the Maryland Shell Fish Com- 
mission in co-operation with the United States Coast and 
Geodetic Survey and the United States Bureau of Fisheries has 
surveyed, charted and legally defined 215,852 acres of natural 
oyster bars which are reserved for all time for the sole use of 
Oystermen. 

Leasable Bottoms: The Maryland Oyster Survey, although 
carried on primarily for the purpose of surveying public 
natural oyster bars, also developed the fact that the State of 
Maryland, — outside of t lie 215,852 acres of public oyster bars 
reserved for oystermen — owns 300,000 acres >f barren bottoms 
where oysters do not now groiv but on ivhich experts and practical 
oystermen say oysters can be made to groio. 

Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars : The history of the 
growth and decline of the industry of baking oysters from the 
natural oyster bars of Maryland shows that these bars produced 
an average of 12,000,000 bushels during the fifteen years of 
1873-8S, and that now by reason of a lack of remedial legislation 
providing /or the practical conservation of these vast oyster 
resources, these same natural oyster bars only produce 4,000,000 
bushels. 

Expenses of Protecting Natural Oyster Bars : The State of 
Maryland has for years been compelled to make direct appro- 
priations aggregating at this date over $100,000 in excess of 
oyster revenues that could be utilized for the expenses of the 
State Fishery Force in protecting the Natural Oyster Bars. 
In view of the preceding fact, it is not reasonable to sup- 
pose that the Governor and the Legislature will consent to make 
additional direct appropriations of the $25,000 that ought to 



be expended annually for the purpose of restoring the natural 
oyster bars of the State. 

Revenue from Leasing: Experts say that fully 100,000 
acres of the so-called barren bottoms of Maryland are of 
the best order for the cultivation of oysters; and that with 
reasonable and practical oyster culture laws such as are in 
force in all progressive oyster culture states, these 100,000 acres 
ivill yield the Slate a large revenue in the near future. 

Campbell-Price Bill: In consequence of the facts stated it is 
now proposed in the Camjibell-Price Bill to provide for the 
Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars along with Oyster Culture 
on Barren Bottoms by : 

1st. Stringent regulations protecting the 215,852 
acres of natural oyster bars reserved for the sole use 
of oystermen by the Maryland Oyster Survey. 

2d. Provision for increasing revenues through en- 
couraging the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by 
granting certain privileges to oyster planters neces- 
sary for the profitable cultivation of oysters. 

3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster 
bars through reshelling and cultivation by providing 
for the equal division of the revenue received from 
oyster planting between a "Special Road Fund " and 
a "Fund for the Conservation of Natural Oyster 
Bars." 

Maryland Oyster Controversy : Those actively interested in 
the oyster question of Maryland seem to be divided into three 
classes, as follows : 

1st. Oystermen and oyster packers interested in 
the restoration of the 215,852 acres of natural oyster 
bars reserved for the use of the public by the Mary- 
land Oyster Survey. 



2d. Oyster planters and oyster packers interested 
in the development of the 300,000 acres of barren 
bottoms pointed out by the Maryland Oyster Survey 
as bottoms where oysters can be made to grow profit- 
ably by cultivation. 

3d. Those who earnestly believe with the Crothers 
Oyster Commission in both the restoration of public 
natural oyster bars and the cultivation of barren bot- 
toms, but who feel that the better manner of accom- 
plishing these objects is to so change, by new laws, 
the plan of the state administration of the oyster 
forces of Maryland, that an unpaid Board of Fish- 
eries will take over the functions of both the Shell 
Fish Commission and the State Fishery Force and 
also have restricted discretionary power to carry on 
the conservation and cultivation of the oyster re- 
sources of Maryland by such means as they find best 
suited to the interests of all concerned. 

The only comment necessary on this phase of the question is 
the obvious one that the Campbell-Price Bill unites the objects 
of the first and second classes, and at the same time in no way 
clashes with the aims of the third class. 



THE CAMPBELL-PRICE BILL. 

Explanation. 
A discussion of each proposed amendment to the 
Haman Oyster Law is boxed in lines and appears 
immediately under the corresponding change in the 
wording of the original law, and consequently the 
text of the bill itself need not be used except for pur- 
poses of technical reference. 



9 

All words added to existing oyster laws have l>een 
typed in CAPITALS. 

All words "struck out" from existing oyster laws 
have been printed in [italics and i nclosed in parenthesis.) 

A BILL ENTITLED AN ACT TO AMEND AN ACT EN- 
TITLED "AN ACT TO ESTABLISH AND PROMOTE 
THE INDUSTRY OF OYSTER CULTURE IN MARY- 
LAND, TO DEFINE AND MARK NATURAL OYSTER 
BEDS, BARS AND ROCKS LYING UNDER THE 
WATERS OF THIS STATE, TO PRESCRIBE PENAL- 
TIES FOR THE INFRINGEMENT OF THE PRO- 
VISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND TO ADD NEW SECTIONS 
TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL 
LAWS, TO FOLLOW .SECTION 82, AND TO BE DESIG- 
NATED, RESPECTIVELY, AS SECTIONS 83, 84, 85, 86, 
87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 
102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 
114, 115, 116, 117, 118 AND 119 ", BY REPEALING AND 
RE-ENACTING WITH AMENDMENTS SECTIONS 98, 
100, 102, 105, 110, 112, 116 AND 118 OF ARTICLE 72 
OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS 
(EDITION 1904), AS ENACTED IN CHAPTER 711 OF 
THE ACTS OF 1906, AND BY ADDING EIGHT NEW 
SECTIONS TO SAID ARTICLE 72, ONE TO FOLLOW 
SECTION 112, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SEC- 
TION 112 A, ONE TO FOLLOW SECTION 115 AND 
BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 115 A, AND SIN 
OTHERS TO FOLLOW SECTION 119 AND TO BE 
DESIGNATED AS 119 A, 119 B, 119 C, 119 D, 119 E 
AND 119 F. 

SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERA/. 
ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND, THAT SECTIONS 98, 
100, 102, 105, 110, 112, 116 AND 118 OF ARTICLE 72 OF 



THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, AS EN- 
ACTED IN CHAPTER 711 OF THE ACTS OF 1906, 
ENTITLED "AN ACT TO ESTABLISH AND PRO- 
MOTE THE INDUSTRY OF OYSTER CULTURE IN 
MARYLAND, TO DEFINE AND MARK NATURAL 
OYSTER BEDS, BARS AND ROCKS LYING UNDER 
THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, TO PRESCRIBE 
PENALTIES FOR THE INFRINGEMENT OF THE 
PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND TO ADD NEW 
SECTIONS TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF 
PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TO FOLLOW SECTION 
82, AND TO BE DESIGNATED RESPECTIVELY AS 
SECTIONS 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 
95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 
108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 1J6, 117, 118 and 
119," BE AND THE SAME ARE HEREBY REPEALED 
AND RE-ENACTED WITH AMENDMENTS, SO AS 
TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

SECTION 98. After the survey provided for herein shall 
have been completed, it shall be the duty of the Board of Shell 
Fish Commissioners to lease, in the name of the State of Mary- 
land, tracts or parcels of land beneath the waters of this State, 
whether within the limits of the counties or elsewhere, in the 
area to be opened for oyster culture, according to the provisions 
of this act ; provided that no tract so leased, if situated within 
the territorial limits of any county in this State, shall contain 
less than one acre of hind, and if situated in any other place, no 
tract so leased shall contain less than five acres. It shall be 
the duty of said board to require that the tracts so leased shall 
be as nearly rectangular as is convenient. It shall be the duty 
of the said board to demand from each lessee payment of the 
rent each year in advance. No person shall be permitted, by 
lease, assignment or in any other manner, to acquire a greater 
amount of laud than (Jen) THIRTY acres situated within the 



10 

territorial limits of any of the coup ties, or (ewe) FIVE hundred 
acres in any other place ; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT 
AN INDIVIDUAL MAY ACQUIRE A TRACT NOT EX- 
CEEDING ONE HUNDRED ACRES OF LAND BENEATH 
THE WATERS OE TANGIER SOUND, 



Discussion: The preceding amendments to exist- 
ing laws indicated bv words in CAPITALS pro- 
vide for an increase in the maximum area which 
may be leased by any one person. 

The greatest possible profits from planting oys- 
ters on barren bottoms of the limited acreage per- 
mitted by existing laws are too small to warrant 
the purchase of the necessary equipment for culti- 
vation of oysters on such areas, or to warrant the 
cost of the equally necessary equipment and ser- 
vices required for private police protection. 

The increase in Tangier Sound is made desirable 
by the fact that its waters are practically "open 
waters." This part of the amendment is made 
necessaiy by reason of a legal interpretation 
which classifies waters of Tangier Sound as being 
"within territorial limits." 



(Section 98, continued) : Leases of such lauds shall be made 
only to residents of Maryland. The term of such leases shall 
be twenty years, and the annual rent reserved to the State shall 
be one dollar per acre for each of the first two years of said 
term of twenty years ; two dollars per acre for the third year; 
three dollars per acre for the fourth year ; four dollars per acre 
for the fifth year; and five dollars per acre during the remainder 
of the term; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT ON ALL 
LEASES WHICH HAVE HERETOFORE BEEN .MADE, 
OR MAY HEREAFTER BE MADE HEREUNDER, THE 
ANNUAL RENT PAYABLE TO THE STATE THERE- 



il 

UNDER AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO APRIL 1st, 1918, 
SHALL BE ONE DOLLAR PER ACRE, AND THE IN- 
CREASE IN ANNUAL RENTALS HEREIN PROVIDED 
FOR THE THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH AND SUBSE- 
QUENT YEARS DURING THE TERM OF ANY LEASE 
SHALL NOT SOONER BECOME EFFECTIVE THAN 
FOR THE FIRST, SECOND, THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT 
YEARS, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE PORTION OF THE 
TERM OF SUCH LEASE SUBSEQUENT TO THE 1st 
DAY OF APRIL, 1918. 



Discussion: Tbe above amendment provides for 
decreased rentals to $1.00 per acre until April 1, 
1918. 

It is proposed in response to a strong demand 
from prospective oyster planters who state they 
should be given a reasonable opportunity for build- 
ing up their business before being charged a rental 
which they now consider prohibitive. 

It is so worded that the Stat>- does not in auy 
way give up any existing rights to ultimately in- 
crease the revenues which it can reasonably hope 
to obtain from the State-owned barren oyster 
bottoms. 



(Section 98, Continued) If any part of the rent reserved 
under such lease shall remain unpaid foi more than six months 
after the same becomes due, such lease or leases may, at the 
option of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners, he declared 
void, and in that event the land shall revert to the State, and 
may be leased again iu accordance with the provisions of this 
Act. The said Board may, at the request of any lessee, if it 
shall appear equitable so to do, upon cause shown iu writing, 
cancel his lease as to the whole or a part of the lands leased. 
THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS IS 
HEREBY DIRECTED TO SUBMIT A PLAN TO THE NEXT 
SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND 



12 

PROVIDING- FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF RENTALS 
FOR LEASED BOTTOMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 
VALUE OF THESE BOTTOMS FOR THE CULTIVA- 
TION OF OYSTERS. 



Discussion: The preceding amendment provides 
for a report to be made to the next legislature on 
the advisability of establishing some method of 
assessing rentals according to the value of tin- 
leased bottoms. It has been added in compliance 
with the suggestions of certain prominent officials 
who feel that while some areas may not be worth 
the yearly rental of one dollar per acre that there 
is much other land worth at least ten dollars per 
acre. 



Section 100. For a period of (four months) THIRTY DAYS 
after the said survey shall have been completed, or after any area 
shall have been opened to leasing under the preceding sections, 
citizens of Maryland, residing in any part of the State, who, at 
the time of the completion of said survej% or at the respective 
times of the opening for oystor culture of the several areas, as 
the case may be, may be owners of land having a water front 
upon any part of the said areas so opened to oyster culture, 
shall have the exclusive right to rent anj r hind opened to oyster 
culture under the provisions of the act, adjacent to their lands. 
And for an additional period of (six mouths) THIRTY DAYS 
after the expiration of the said period of (four months) THIRTY 
DAYS all boatmen, residents of this State, who shall be engaged 
in the business of dredging, scraping or tonging for oysters at 
the time of the completion of the said survey, or at the respec- 
tive times of the opening for oyster culture of the several areas, 
or if said survey shall be completed, or the said anas shall be 
opened to oyster culture during the closed season for dredging, 
scraping or tonging, as the case may be, then the person so 
engaged at the end of the last dredging, scraping or tonging 



13 



season shall have the like exclusive right in the order of their 
respective applications, as the same may be received and opened 
by the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners to rent any adjacent 
lauds ; provided, that in no event shall any such landowner, 
boatman or any other person be permitted to rent or acquire 
more than (ien) THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or 
(one) FIVE hundred acres, as the case may be, dependent upon 
the situation of the land which is leased or acquired ; and pro- 
vided, further, that no such riparian landowner, as is mentioned 
in this section, shall be entitled to rent the amount of (ten) 
THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or (one) FIVE 
hundred acres, as the case may be, unless the water front of 
the land so owned by him, if fronting on water within the terri- 
torial limits of a county, be at least two hundred yards, or if front- 
ing on waters in any other place, be at least seven hundred yards. 
The owners of land having a less water front than is mentioned 
above shall be entitled to rent a proportionately less amount of 
land, dependent upon the length of the front upon water within 
county limits or elsewhere. 



Discussion : The preceding amendments in rela- 
tion to the period within which certain classes of 
individuals have priority of rights to lease barren 
bottoms will be only effective in Talbot and Dor- 
chester couuties which have not yet been opened 
for leasing. 

They are not essential amendments except in so 
far as they will permit Talbot and Dorchester coun- 
ties to obtain full rights of leasing before the open- 
ing of the next oyster season. 

The above amendments in relation to acreage 
that may be leased are only necessary as a pa»rt of 
similar provisions in Section 98 and discussed 
under that heading. 



14 

Section 102. Wben the period of (ten months), SIXTY 
DAYS shall Lave elapsed after said survey shall have be< Q 
completed, and after the lands beneath the waters of any area 
shall have been opened to leasing under Section 90 of this Act, 
the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners shall endeavor to lease 
the remaining portions of land so open to oyster culture under 
the provisions of this Act to applicants, who shall be residents 
of Maryland, in the order of their applications received and 
opened by said Commissioners. 



Discussion: The above amendment in relation 
to the period within which certain classes of indi- 
viduals have priority of rights to lease barren bot- 
toms is only necessary as a part of a related pro- 
vision in Section 100 and discussed under thai 
heading. 



SECTION 105. The relation of landlord and tenant stated in 
Section 10-1 shall have all the incidents attaching to that rela- 
tion as the same exists under the laws of Maryland, excepting 
only the following particulars : 

(First: The only remedy of the State for non-payment <>/' the 
rent of oyster lands shall be the strict enforcement of the provi- 
sions set forth in Section 98 of this Act. Upon the non-pay- 
ment of any rent for the time therein mentioned it shall he the 
duly of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners, after a writU n 
notice of not less than ten days In lite lessee, I" declare the lease 
vacated by stamping the word " Void" in distinct letters aci-oss 
the description in the register.} 

(Second) FIRST : Laud leased under this act shall lie used 
only for the purpose of planting and cultivating oysters ; 

(Third) SECOND: No right shall exist to redeem or pur- 
chase any laud of the State so leased ; 



15 

(Fourth) THIRD : Any other modification caused by the 
provisions of this act. 



Discussion : 


The 


above 


amend 


mei 


ts 


are con- 


nected with 


the proposed 


new 


Sec- 


tii m 115 A, 


which relates to the 


collection of rent a 


is, 


and they 


are discussed 


under 


that heading. 









Section 110. No assignment or transfer of any interest 
acquired by this Act shall be valid for any purpose if made 
to a non-resident of this State. If any such assignment is 
attempted to be made, all interest of the grantor, or assignor, 
shall revert to the State as if no lease had ever been made. If 
any assignment of any interest created by this act is attempted 
to be made to any corporation, or joint stock company, all the 
interest of the grantor or assignor shall revert to the State as if 
no lease had ever been made. If any assignment or any inter- 
est created by this act is attempted to be made to any person 
in such a way that the assignee shall become the. holder of 
more than (ten) THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or 
(one) FIVE hundred acres, as the case may be, according to the 
location of land leased under this Act, all interest of the 
grantor or assignor, in ease of such an assignment, shall 
revert to the State as if no lease had been made. 



Discussion : The preceding amendment is only 
necessary as a part of the amendments proposed to 
Section 98 for the increase in acreage of State- 
owned bottoms that may be leased by one indi- 
vidual, and is discussed under that heading. 



Section 112. It shall not be necessary for any holder of 
oyster land under this Act to take out any license for dredging, 
scraping or tonging oysters on any laud so held by him ; and 
oysters on such land ma}' be taken in such manner as may be 



16 

desirpcl by the holder of such land, and at such times as may 
be desired by the holder of such land, BETWEEN SI'NUISK 
AND SUNSET OF ANY WEEK DAY BETWEEN THE 
FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER IN ANY YEAR 
AND THE FIFTEENTH OF JUNE IN THE FOLLOWING 
YEAR (as allowed by the existing laws of this Stale). IT IS. 
HOWEVER, SPECIALLY PROVIDED THAT IT SHALL 
BE UNLAWFUL FOR ANY HOLDER OF LAND UNDER 
THIS ACT TO TAKE UP OYSTERS FROM THE LAND 
SO HELD BY HIM DURING THE CLOSED SEA- 
SON FOR THE DREDGING OF OYSTERS FROM 
THE NATURAL BARS OF THIS STATE, UNTIL AFTER 
HE HAS GIVEN A WRITTEN NOTICE OF AT LEAST 
THREE DAYS OF HIS INTENTION SO TO DO, TO 
THE OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF THE NEAREST 
POLICE BOAT, IN WHICH NOTICE HE SHALL NAME 
THE WEEK DAY OR WEEK DAYS AND THE HOURS 
BETWEEN SUNRISE AND SUNSET OF SUCH WEEK 
DAY OR W r EEK DAYS IN SUCH CLOSED SEASON 
DURING WHICH HE MAY INTEND TO TAKE OYS- 
TERS FROM SUCH LAND, AND IT SHALL BE UN- 
LAWFUL FOR THE HOLDER OF ANY SUCH LAND 
TO TAKE UP OYSTERS FROM THE LAND HELD BY 
HIM AT ANY OTHER TIMES THAN THOSE NAMED 
IN SUCH NOTICE. ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY 
OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE 
DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON 
INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT 
COURT FOR ANY COUNTY OF THIS STATE, OR IN 
THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- 
FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE 
SUBJECT TO ALL THE PENALTIES PROVIDED IN 
SEC. 24 OF THIS ARTICLE FOR TAKING OYSTERS 
UNLAWFULLY WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF CER- 
TAIN SECTIONS THEREIN REFERRED TO. 



17 



Discussion : The preceding amendments permit- 
ting the taking and cultivation of leased oyster 
plantations on the same practical basis existing in 
all the progressive oyster states which have been 
increasing their oyster industries while those of 
Maryland have been decreasing, are the very "key- 
stone" of the whole Campbell-Price Bill. 

To fail to enact the essential features of this 
Section, is to fail to provide that which is abso- 
lutely necessary for a real oyster culture that will 
actually mean anything to the oyster industry of 
the State. 

Such a failure to enact the essential features of 
the preceding sections means further that no rev- 
enue of any importance can be expected from the 
lease of the immensely valuable barren oyster bot- 
toms of the State, and therefore it also means that 
the "Fund for the Conservation of Natural Oyster 
Bars" established in other sections of the Camp- 
bell-Price Bill will be ineffective, if not actually 
non-existent as far as money is concerned. 

This matter is of extreme importance to those 
interested in the development of the oyster indus- 
tries of Maryland, and consequently in support of 
this contention there is quoted below a carefully 
prepared statement from Dr. H. F. Moore of the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries, who has a 
world-wide knowledge and practical experience in 
all phases of the "oyster question." 

Doctor Moore writes : " As I view the case, the 
amendments asked for represent the irreducible 
mimimum necessary to perfect the law and make 
it effective. The elimination of any part of the 
amendments will be against the interests of the 



18 



State, oyster culture and the oyster industry as a 
whole, and will seriously retard the assumption of 
the position to which Maryland's natural advan- 
tages entitle, her. The amendments were proposed 
sifter careful consideration, all not absolutely essen- 
tial was eliminated, and there was nothing inserted 
for the purpose of trading or compromise." 

"I do not believe that your Commission can 
afford to acquiesce, even under stress, to measures 
which will militate against the interests entrusted 
to your care. I do not understand that you even 
contemplate such action, but feel that my connec- 
tion with the Maryland survey makes it obligatory, 
in justice to myself, to express myself frankly. 
Should an unsatisfactory compromise be accom- 
plished, the odium of its failure as a practical 
measure must fall on all who acquiesced in its 
perpetration. If the recommendations of the 
Commission be rejected, the responsibility will lie 
on those who opposed them, and we who have 
eudeavored to give the subject our best study will 
be absolved." 

The existing laws have been construed to pro- 
hibit oyster planters from taking their cultivated 
oysters from leased oyster beds by any means not 
permitted in taking oysters from the natural oyster 
bars of the same locality. Which construction of 
the law should be contrasted with the facts that 
the oyster planter must pay rental to the State, 
must prepare the leased bottoms for planting, 
must purchase and plant seed oysters, must cul- 
tivate the oysters when planted, and provide pri- 
vate police protection, while on the other hand the 
competing oystermen using the neighboring nat- 
ural ovster bars are under no such expense. 



19 



The preceding amendments remove certain of 
these restrictions on oyster planting for certain 
months of the year ; and then only for week days 
(not Sundays) between the times of sunrise and 
sunset; and they also stipulate that notice of such 
intention must be given certain oyster police offi- 
cials after the close of the dredging season. 

The use of tongs for gathering oysters is a slow 
and expensive method, and can be profitably em- 
ployed only in case the bottom is closely stocked 
with oysters ; hence lessees of oyster lots in local- 
ities where dredging is prohibited are compelled 
to plant their oysters so thickly upon the bottom 
that the available supply of oyster food in the 
water is not sufficient to provide for their proper 
nourishment and growth. The numerous failures 
in oyster culture which are due to such overplant- 
ing can be largely avoided when the right to gather 
planted oysters with a dredge has been granted. 
Planters will then be able to take into account the 
oyster food supply and distribute their oysters ac- 
cordingly, for no matter how scatteriugly oysters 
may be distributed over the bottom, they can be 
rapidly and economically gathered with proper 
equipment. 

The sudden scarcity or abundance of a food sup- 
ply increases or decreases its value a correspond- 
ing amount. Oysters are no exception to this rule, 
and the use of economical equipment for quickly- 
gathering cultivated oysters from a known supply- 
on leased bottoms is one absolutely essential re- 
quirement for profitable oyster farming. It is 
partly through such profits as come from prompt 
delivery of oysters at the best market price that 
an oyster planter is enabled to compete with the 



20 



natural bar oystermen who have no extra expenses 
of rental, shelling of bottoms, purchase of seed, 
policing of property, and so forth. 

The granting of the privileges permitted by the 

proposed amendments to Section 112 are opposed 
chiefly on the ground that oyster planters will take 
a criminal advantage of these rights to steal oys- 
ters from the natural oyster bars. As a matter of 
fact, all know that the real danger is quite the re- 
verse, and that an oyster planter with his vested 
interests in his oysters on his leased beds has the 
more to fear when it comes to "appropriating" 
oysters from the oyster-producing waters of Mary- 
land. Retaliation by natural-growth oystermen 
for the misuse of privileges by the oyster planter 
would be only too easy. While on the other hand 
there is no way by which the planter can punish 
the " natural growther " except to catch him " red- 
handed." 

However, in spite of these facts, and as a further 
answer to the objections raised against the grant- 
ing of the proposed privileges, there has been 
added a new section (112 A) which provides ample 
and effective means for conviction and punishment 
of any planter so short-sighted as to attempt steal- 
ing of oysters from public oyster bars. For addi- 
tional comments on this phase of the amendments 
see the discussion under the heading of Section 
112 A. 



21 

SECTION 116. In addition to other penalties herein pro- 
vided, any person convicted of a violation of this act under either 
of the (three) SIX preceding sections (SECTIONS 112-A to 
115-A, BOTH INCLUSIVE), shall be and is hereby denied 
the right to take out any license to dredge, scrape or tong for 
oysters in any waters of this State for the period of three years 
after said conviction. 



Discussion: The amendments to the preced- 
ing section are only made for the technical 
legal reason of making its penalties applicable to 
violators of the law under Section 1 12 and the two 
following new Sections 112 A and 115 A. 



Section 118. The revenue arising from the operation of this 
Act shall be applied in the following manner: 

First : To the payment of all (salaries) expenses (surveys, out- 
lays) and disbursements authorized by this Act. 

Second: The balance to be paid at the end of each year into 
the Treasury of the State (leaving, however, a balance of Ten 
Thousand Dollars icith the Hoard of Shell Fish Commissioners to 
be applied to the current expenses of its office for the ensuing year. 
All moneys so paid aforesaid info the Treasury of the State shall 
be placed to the credit of a special fund called the "Special Road 
Fund"), TO BE PLACED TO THE CREDIT OF, AND 
DIVIDED EQUALLY BETWEEN TWO SPECIAL FUNDS 
THE FIEST TO BE KNOWN AS THE -SPECIAL ROAD 
FUND," AND THE SECOND TO BE KNOWN AS A 
"FUND FOR THE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYS- 
TER BARS." 



22 



Discussion : The preceding amendments provide 
for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars 
through reshelling and restocking by establishing 
a fund for that purpose equal to one-half of the 
net revenue received from the leasing of oyster 
plantations on barren bottoms. 

The omitted portions of Section 118 of the 
existing law are no longer necessary as the Mary- 
land Oyster Survey is now complete, and no fur- 
ther money is required for that purpose. 

In connection with these amendments, it is per- 
tinent to state that it is estimated the revenue which 
will be received from leasing of barren bottoms 
within the nest five years will net at least §50,000 
a year, and that riltimately the revenue from this 
source should reach some hundreds of thousands 
of dollars annually. PROVIDED, THAT LAWS 
PERMITTING OTSTEE PLANTING ON A 
PRACTICAL BASIS SUCH AS EXIST IN 
PROGRESSIVE OYSTER CULTURE STATES 
BE ENACTED BY THE MARYLAND LEG- 
ISLATURE. 



SEC. 2. AND BE IT ENACTED, THAT THE FOL- 
LOWING SECTION BE AND IT IS HEREBY ADDED 
TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL 
LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS", TO FOLLOW SECTION 
112, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 112-A: 

SECTION 112 A. ANY PERSON WHO, BEING A 
LESSEE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, 
SHALL DREDGE OR OTHERWISE TAKE OYSTERS 
FROM ANY OF THE NATURAL BEDS OR BARS IN 
THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, IN VIOLATION OF 
ANY OF THE LAWS OF THIS STATE, SHALL BE 
DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON 
INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT 



28 

COUKT FOE ANY COUNTY OF THIS STATE, OR IN 
THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- 
FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE 
SUBJECT TO ALL THE PENALTIES PROVIDED IN 
SECTION 24 OF THIS ARTICLE FOR TAKING 
OYSTERS UNLAWFULLY WITHIN THE PROVISIONS 
OF CERTAIN SECTIONS THEREIN REFERRED TO. 



Discussion : The preceding amendments provide 
for the punishment of any lessee of oyster bottoms 
who is foolish enough to violate the laws of the 
state by dredging oysters from natural oyster bars. 

It is held by opponents to oyster culture in 
Maryland that the government of the State of 
Maryland is unable to protect itself against the 
assumed criminal oyster planters, and therefore 
the preceding amendment would not be effective. 

Such an assumption that oyster planters are 
criminals and that the State of Maryland has nut 
the power to protect herself against such crim- 
inals is unreasonable, a slander on the people of 
Maryland, and on the administration of the gov- 
ernment of Maryland, and it is unbelievable that 
such an assumption will lie permanently accepted 
as a truth by the law-abiding people of Maryland. 

As a matter of fact, two honest police officials 
located on shore with telescopes and a speed motor 
boat nearby, could easily capture any criminal 
oyster planter violating the laws of the State. 
And the conviction of one or two such planters, 
with the attending disgrace of criminal punish- 
ment and the penalties provided for under the 
preceding section would go far towards creating a 
public seutiment and fear that would protect the 
public oyster bars from such marauders. 



24 

Section 24 referred to in the preceding section 112 A is as 
follows : 

(1894, ch. 380, sec. 23.) 
24. ANY MASTER OR PERSON IN CHARGE OF ANY 
VESSEL WHO SHALL VIOLATE ANY OF THE PRO- 
VISIONS OF THE PRECEDING SECTIONS FROM 19 
TO 21 INCLUSIVE BY TAKING OYSTERS UNLAW- 
FULLY SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF A MIS- 
DEMEANOR AND UPON INDICTMENT AND CONVIC- 
TION IN ANY CIRCUIT COURT IN THIS STATE, OR 
IN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE, BEFORE 
WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE SENT- 
ENCED TO THE HOUSE OF CORRECTION FOR A 
TERM NOT LESS THAN THREE MONTHS NOR MORE 
THAN ONE YEAR AND THE BOAT OR VESSEL USED 
IN SUCH VIOLATION, TOGETHER WITH THE 
PAPERS, FURNITURE AND TACKLE ON BOARD OF 
SAID BOAT OR VESSEL AT THE TIME OF SAID 
VIOLATION SHALL BE FORFEITED, BUT SHALL BE 
RELEASED UPON THE PAYMENT OF NOT LESS 
THAN ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS NOR MORE THAN 
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND COSTS AND EX- 
PENSES FOR EACH AND EVERY VIOLATION OF 
THE PRECEDING SECTIONS, IN THE DISCRETION 
OF THE COURT. 

SEC. 3. AND BE IT EN AG TED, THAT THE FOL- 
LOWING SECTION BE AND IT IS HEREBY ADDED 
TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL 
LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS", TO FOLLOW SECTION 
115 AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 115 A : 



25 

SECTION 115 A. It SHALL BE UNLAWFUL EOE 
ANY PEESON OTHER THAN A LESSEE UNDER THIS 
ACT, OR FOR ANY LESSEE UNDER THIS ACT, WHILE 
HE SHALL BE IN DEFAULT IN PAYMENT ON RENT, 
TO APPROPRIATE TO HIMSELF FOR ANY PURPOSE 
ANY OF THE BARREN BOTTOMS UNDER THE WATERS 
OF THIS STATE WHICH ARE, BY THE PROVISIONS 
OF THIS ACT, SUBJECT TO LEASE, OR TO USE ANY 
SUCH BARREN BOTTOMS IN ANY WAY FOR THE 
PURPOSE OF BEDDING, PLANTING OR CULTIVATING 
OYSTERS, AND ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY OF 
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE 
DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON 
INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT 
COURT FOR ANY COUNTY IN THIS STATE, OR IN 
THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- 
FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE 
FINED THE SUM OF FIFTY DOLLARS FOR EACH 
VIOLATION THEREOF. EACH DAY DURING WHICH 
OR IN WHICH ANY OF THE ACTS PROHIBITED BY 
THIS SECTION MAY BE PERFORMED SHALL CON- 
STITUTE A SEPARATE VIOLATION OF ITS PRO- 
VISIONS. IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE 
STATE'S ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY HAVING 
JURISDICTION, OR OF BALTIMORE CITY AT THE 
REQUEST OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COM- 
MISSIONERS, TO PROSECUTE ANY ONE VIOLATING 
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION. THE NET 
PROCEEDS OF FINES COLLECTED UNDER THIS 
SECTION SHALL BE APPLIED AS FOLLOWS : ONE- 
HALF OF THE SAME SHALL BE PAID TO THE 
INFORMER, IF ANY, AND THE REMAINDER SHALL 
BE APPLIED ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF 
SECTION 118 OF THIS ARTICLE. 



26 



Discussion : The preceding section together with 
section 105 as amended provide for the collection 
of rentals for use of State owned oyster bottoms, 
be they leased or otherwise appropriated without 
a lease. 

From the standpoint of the State there is one 
serious defect in the law as originally enacted, 
whereby it has been found to be impossible to col- 
lect the rents due for the use of lots leased from 
the State for the purpose of oyster culture or to 
prevent individuals from appropriating and using 
oyster lands for oyster-planting operations without 
having first leased them from the State. 

A very considerable number of lots are now held 
and used for oyster-planting purposes by planters 
who pay no rent to the State. Some of these lots 
have been surveyed, records have been made of 
the surveys, and leases have been issued to the 
holders, but others are being held and used with- 
out any formality having been entered into be- 
tween the holders and the State. 

The State, having expended a considerable sum 
of money in perfecting the conditions under which 
oyster culture may be successfully carried on, 
should now take the necessary steps to prohibit tin- 
use of ground for oyster culture by persons who 
do not hold leases to the ground or who are delin- 
quent in the payment of rent. 



27 

SECTION 4. AND BE IT EXACTED, THAT THE 
FOLLOWING SIX SECTIONS BE AND THEY ARE 
HEREBY ADDED TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF 
PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS," TO 
FOLLOW SECTION 119, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS 
SECTIONS 119 A, 119 B, 119 C, 119 D, 119 E AND 119 F : 



Note: The following six sections relate to the 
"Price Oyster Plan" for the "Conservation of 
Natural Oyster Bars,'' and are discussed in that 
part of this publication immediately following Sec- 
tion 119 F. 



SECTION 119 A. IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE 
BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS TO TAKE 
SUCH MEASURES AS IN ITS JUDGMENT SHALL 
SEEM BEST CALCULATED TO INCREASE THE PRO- 
DUCTIVITY OF ANY PART OF THE NATURAL OYS- 
TER BARS DEFINED AS SUCH BY RECOHDS AND 
CHARTS FILED WITH THE COURTS OF THIS STATE; 
AND THE EXPENSE OF SO DOING SHALL BE PAID 
OUT OF THE "FUND FOR THE CONSERVATION OF 
NATURAL OYSTER BARS," UPON REQUISITION 
MADE BY THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMIS- 
SIONERS, ENDORSED BY THE COMPTROLLER OF 
THE STATE. 

SECTION 119 B. ANY NATURAL OYSTER BAR OR 
BARS, OR PARTS OF BAR OR BARS, WHICH THE 
BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS MAY 
DESIGNATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING CULTI- 
VATED AND RESTORED MAY BE EXEMPTED BY 
THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS 
FROM ALL RIGHTS OF TAKING OYSTERS IN ANY 



28 

MANNER BY ANY PERSON WHATSOEVER FOR \ 
PERIOD TO BE SPECIFIED IN A NOTRE OF SUCH 
INTENTION TO BE PUBLISHED IN LOCAL PAPERS 
THIRTY DAYS PRIOR TO SUCH ACTION; PROVIDED 
THAT SAID PUBLISHED NOTICE SHALL BECOME 
VOID AND OF NO EFFECT AT ANY TIME DURING 
THE PERIOD OF THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE PUB- 
LICATION OF SAID NOTICE BY THE FILING OF A 
PETITION WITH THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COM- 
MISSIONERS SIGNED BY TWENTY-FIVE LICENSED 
OYSTERMEN ENTITLED TO TAKE OYSTERS FROM 
THE BARS OR PARTS OF BARS DESIGNATED BY 
THE SAID NOTICE. 

SECTION 119 C. FOR THE PURPOSE OF PER- 
FORMING THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON THE BOARD 
OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS BY SECTIONS 
119 A AND 119 B, THEY MAY EMPLOY A SUPERIN- 
TENDENT OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS, OR DESIG- 
NATE ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD OF 
SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS TO ACT AS SUCH, 
AND IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF SUCH SUPERIN- 
TENDENT, UNDER DIRECTION OF THE BOARD OF 
SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS, TO GIVE PERSONAL 
SUPERVISION TO THE WORK OF CULTIVATING AND 
RESTORING THE NATURAL OYSTER BARS DESIG- 
NATED FOR THAT PURPOSE BY THE ORDER OF 
THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS. 

SECTION 119 D. THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH C< >M- 
MISSIONERS, IN ADDITION TO TAKINO SUCH MEAS 
URES OF CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYSTER 
BARS AS IN ITS JUDGMENT SEEMS ADVISABLE, 
SHALL PURCHASE FROM THE LOWEST RESPONS] 
BLE BIDDER, SHELLS OR OYSTERS AT SUCH 



29 

PLACES AND IN SUCH QUANTITIES AS MAY BE 
NEEDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESTORING THE 
NATURAL OYSTER BARS, AND IN INVITING PRO- 
POSALS FOR SUCH SHELLS OR OYSTERS THEY 
MAY PRESCRIBE THAT THE SHELLS OR OYSTERS 
SHALL BE DELIVERED AT A CONVENIENT PLACE 
FOR SHIPMENT, OR THEY MAY REQUIRE THAT 
THE SAID SHELLS OR OYSTERS BE DELIVERED 
AND DISTRIBUTED BY THE SELLERS THEREOF 
ON SUCH PARTICULAR NATURAL OYSTER BARS, 
OR PARTS OF BARS, AS THE BOARD OF SHELL 
FISH COMMISSIONERS MAY BE ENGAGED IN CUL- 
TIVATING AND RESTORING, AND THE BOARD OF 
SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS SHALL HAVE THE 
POWER TO CAUSE SUCH SHELLS OR OYSTERS TO 
BE PROPERLY DISTRIBUTED ON THE DESIGNATED 
NATURAL OYSTER BARS, OR PARTS OF BARS UN- 
DER THE DIRECTION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 
OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS. 

SECTION 119 E. FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIS- 
CHARGING THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON IT BY 
THE FOUR PRECEDING SECTIONS OF THIS ACT, 
THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS 
SHALL HAVE THE SAME CONTROL AND DIREC- 
TION AND BE TO THE SAME EXTENT OVER THE 
STATE FISHERY FORCE, AS IS GIVEN TO SAID 
BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS BY SEC- 
TION 97 OF THIS ARTICLE. 

SECTION 119 F. THE SAID BOARD OF SHELL 
FISH COMMISSIONERS SHALL IN NO CASE CON- 
TRACT ANY OBLIGATION OR INCUR ANY INDEBT- 
EDNESS FOR THE RESTORING AND RE-SHELLING 
OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS IN EXCESS OF MONEY 
AT THE TIME OF THE INCURRING OF SAID OBLI- 



30 

GATION OR CONTRACTING OF SAID DEBT, IN Till 
STATE TREASURY TO THE CREDIT OF THE " FUND 
EOR CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYSTEB BA] 



Discussion: The preceding six new sections 
119 a to 119 f inclusive, provide in accordance 
with the "Price Oyster Plan" I'm- conservation 

and restoration of the 215,852 acres of natural 
oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen 
by the Maryland Oyster Survey. Tin- money for 
this purpose to be obtained through revenues thai 
ivill be received from the fens/;/;/ "/' oyster planta- 
tions on barren bottoms as soon as lairs are pasted 
by the. Maryland Legislature permitting oyster cul- 
ture on the same practical basis existing in thosi 
progressive oyster culture states which an- mur 
rapidly talcing atcay the better pari of the oyster 
trade once held by Maryland. 

The history of the growth and decline of (he 
industry of taking oysters from the natural oyster 
bars of Maryland shows that these oyster burs 
produced an average of 12,000,000 bushels during 
the fifteen years of 1873-88, and thai now by rea- 
son of a lack of remedial, legislation providing for 
the practical conservation of these vast oyster 
resources these same oyster bars only produce 
4,000,000 bushels. 

Stating the preceding paragraph in another way, 
the oystermen of Maryland have been permitted to 
so rob themselves since the fifteen years ending in 
1888, that it is conservatively estimated on the 
basis of present prices that they have made ust less 
over thirty million dollars of their own oyster prop- 
erties. 



31 



In the face of these facts the need of the conser- 
vation of the natural oyster bars of Maryland can 
not be honestly questioned, or can it be open to 
doubt in the face of other facts stated in other 
parts of this pamphlet that the leasing of oyster 
plantations on barren bottoms will provide the 
necessary revenue for this purpose, provided oyster 
laivs are passed by the Maryland Legislature per- 
mitting oyster culture on the same practical basis 
existing in progressive oyster culture States which 
have increased their production of oysters by 
8,000,000 bushels during the same period in which 
the production of oysters in Maryland teas decreased 
by the same amount. 



SECTION 5. AND BE IT ENACTED, THIS ACT 
SHALL TAKE EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ITS 
PASSAGE, AND THAT ALL ACTS, OR PORTIONS OF 
ACTS, INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, SHALL BE ^ND 
THE SAME ARE HEREBY REPEALED. 



32 



NOTES RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT 

AND CONSERVATION OF THE OYSTER 

RESOURCES OF MARYLAND- 



(Cross-References to Notes.) 



Advance of oyster industries in other States. 
Notes': 4, 9, 12, 21, 22, 23. 

Area that may be leased. 

Notes': 14, 31, 34, 37. 

Barren bottoms available for oyster planting under practical 
oyster culture laws. 

Notes : 10, 15, 21, 34, 37. 

Benefits of oyster culture and conservation t<> oystermen. 
Notes: 8, 17, 21, 23, 28, 30. 

Conditions for oyster culture in Maryland different from other 
States. 

Notes : 4, 7, 9, 16, 18, 21, 22, 26, 35. 

Connecticut. 

Notes : 7, 9, 16, 21. 

Conservation of natural oyster bars. 

Notes : 8, 13, 19, 23, 28, 29, 30, MS. 

Corporations can not engage in oyster culture. 
Notes : 14, 33, 34. 

Danger of monopolj- from oyster culture. 
Notes : 14, 31, 34, 37. 



33 

Danger of monopoly from dredging under existing laws. 
Note: 37. 

Decline of Maryland's oyster industries. 
Notes : 13, 23, 28, 29, 38. 

Destruction of the natural oyster bars. 
Notes : 8, 13, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38. 

Essentials for success in oyster culture in Maryland. 
Note : 15. 

Expenses of the Maryland Shell Fish Commission. 
Note: 39. 

Expenses of the State Fishery Force. 
Notes : 19, 30. 

Glut of oysters. 

Notes : 23, 35, 36. 

Greatness of the oyster industry of the United States. 
Notes : 3, 25. 

Growth of oyster industries of United States while those of 
Maryland have decreased. 

Notes : 9, 13, 21, 23, 35. 

History of the growth and decline of Maryland's oyster indus- 
tries. 

Notes : 8, 13, 3S. 

Is oyster culture a theory ? 

Notes : 4, 9, 12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 22, 24, 35. 

Kellogg on the oyster in politics. 
Note: 26. 

Loss due to a lack of remedial legislation. 

Notes : 1, 8, 10, 19, 23, 26, 28, 29, 38. 

Maryland Oyster Survey. 

Notes : 2, 6, 10, 11, 27, 39. 



34 

Maryland's rank as an oyster producing State. 
Notes : 3, 18, 21, 26, 38. 

Natural oyster bars irrevocably reserved for tbe oystermen of 
Maryland. 

Notes : 2, 6, 11, 21, 27. 

New York. 

Notes : 9, 18. 

Non-residents. 

Notes : 14, 32. 

Opportunity for individual oystermen to become oyster planters. 
Note: 17. 

Oyster legislation. 

Notes : 1, 10, 15, 26. 

Quantity of cultivated oysters in tbe United States. 
Notes : 12, 23, 35, 38. 



■*> "") W) 



Rbode Island. 

Notes : 5, 24. 

Revenue to State government from oyster planting. 
Notes : 5, 24, 39. 

Starfisb and otber enemies to oyster culture. 

Note: 7. 

Total production of oysters in tbe United States. 
Notes : 3, 12, 23, 25. 

Virginia. 

Notes : 4, 22. 

Value of cultivated oysters in tbe United States. 
Notes : 12, 18, 23, 35. 

Will oyster culture reduce prices? 
Note: 36. 



35 

NOTES RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 
OYSTER RESOURCES OF MARYLAND. 

1. The aim of future oyster legislation iu Maryland should 
be to develop her vast 03'ster resources, and then to so manage 
them that they will produce a large revenue for the benefit of 
the entire State. For more than thirty years all oyster legis- 
lation has been directed toward preventing the destruction of 
natural oyster bars, but this legislation has done nothing more 
than to retard this destruction. And now greatly to the discredit 
of Maryland's administrative capacity, her oyster industries 
have not only degenerated to one-fifth of their known possibili- 
ties but they have also become an expense to the State instead 
of a source -of great revenue. 

2. The State and Federal governments combined have 
expended over two hundred thousand dollars and over five 
years of time in surveying the more than two hundred thou- 
sand acres of the natural oyster bars of Maryland so that they 
could be accurately charted for the purpose of irrevocably 
reserving them for the sole use of oystermen. 

3. It is estimated that in 1910-11 the total production of 
oysters in the United States was 35,000,000 bushels and that 
Maryland only supplied one-tenth of this total. 

4. Just on the other side of the imaginary Maryland-Vir- 
ginia boundary line in the county of Accomac, in the State of 
Virginia, there are thousands of acres of oyster bottoms under 
cultivation as contrasted with tens of acres in the adjacent 
county of Somerset in the State of Maryland. 

5. In Rhode Island one oyster planter alone pays the gov- 
ernment of that State $27,000 each year for the rental of 
4,700 acres of barren bottoms where oysters never grew before 
they were cultivated. 



36 

6. The Hnman Oyster Culture Law provided that an accu- 
rate survey of the natural oyster bars should he made, and its 
provisions for this purpose have proven to be most practical 

and satisfactory. As a result of this survey 215,852 acres of 
natural oyster bars have been charted and reserved for the sole 
use of oystermen. This area greatly exceeds any estimate 
made previous to the survey. And this fact should convince 
all fair-minded oystermen that the State has no thought of sac- 
rificing their interests for the benefit of oyster planters. 

7. In Connecticut and many other oyster-culture States the 
oyster planters have to expend large sums of money in protect- 
ing their oysters against destruction by star fish and other ene- 
mies of oysters. In Maryland the 03'sters are practically 
free of such enemies, and this one thing alone gives the oyster 
planters of Maryland a great advantage over many of their 
competitors in other States. 

8. The oystermen of Maryland have so robbed themselves 
since 1884, that it is conservatively estimated on the basis of 
present prices that they have made useless over thirty million dol- 
lars worth of their own oyster properties and at the same time 
prevented for all those years the development of other oyster 
properties of fully equal value. 

9. By oyster culture methods Connecticut, Rhode Island, 
New York, New Jersey and Delaware have greatly increased 
both the quantity and the value of their oysters, while on the 
other hand during Hie same period Maryland has greatly deer< ast d 
both the quantity and the value of her oysters. 

10. The Maryland Oyster Survey has shown that, in addition 
to 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars, the State of Maryland 
owns and absolutely controls 300,000 acres of bottoms which 
can produce oysters but which are now barren. And it has been 
clearly demonstrated that the Hainan Oyster Culture Law in 



37 

its present form fails to provide the necessary foundation 
required for the practical development of oyster culture on these 
300,000 acres of the state-owned oyster bottoms. 

11. The State and Federal governments combined have 
published and filed with the courts of Maryland over two thou- 
sand printed pages of technical records, and forty-four large 
charts, for the sole purpose of defining and securing to the 
oystermen of Maryland all their ancient rights of free fishery 
on over two hundred thousand acres of public oyster bars. 

12. In 1908 forty-four per cent of all oysters produced in 
the United States were cultivated oysters, and their value was 
sixty-five per cent, of the total. 

13. Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and 
Virginia have greatly increased their production of oysters 
while Maryland has decreased her production of oysters from 

fifteen million of bushel in 1884-85 to three and one-half million 
of bushels in 1!) 10-11. 

14. If the Hainan Oyster Culture Law is amended as pro- 
posed by the Campbell-Price Bill, it will still say that " no cor- 
poration, or joint stock company, shall be permitted to lease or 
take up, or to acquire by assignment, or otherwise, any lands 
of the State for oyster planting or cultivation ;" that the " term 
of all leases shall be twenty years ; " that " leases shall be made 
only to residents of Maryland ; " and that " no person shall be 
permitted, by lease, assignment, or in any manner, to acquire a 
greater amount of land than thirty acres situated within terri- 
torial limits of the counties, or five hundred acres in any other 
place." 

15. Maryland has stopped short of offering sufficient induce- 
ments to her citizens to cultivate oysters on barren bottoms. 



38 

She has withheld certain rights and privileges which are recog- 
nized by all progressive oyster States as being absolutely 
essential to success in oyster planting operations, and it is 
folly to expect, and wrong to urge Maryland's citizens, to 
lease any portion of her 300,000 acres of state-owned barren 
oyster bottoms until her laws are so amended as to provide 
the rights and privileges demonstrated to be essential to suc- 
cess in culture of oysters on bottoms where oysters do not 



16. One oyster culturist in Connecticut plants over fire hun- 
dred thousand bushels of clean shells each year to catch 
"oyster spat" for seed, while in Maryland nature provides 
each year many hundreds of thousands of bushels of seed 
oysters which are killed each year by freshets, and are thns 
wasted unless illegally taken up for steaming or selling to 
oyster planters of Connecticut, Virginia and other States. 

17. Oyster planting not only benefits the oyster planter but 
idso benefits the oystermen in many ways, as for example : 
establishing brands for oysters that increase the reputation 
and value of all oysters of the State including those taken from 
the natural oyster bars ; increasing the number of " spat " 
likely to "set" on the natural oyster bars; increasing the 
demand and consequently the price of small oysters only- fit for 
planting ; supplying opportunities for employment in cultivation 
of oyster farms during closed season ; increasing the demand 
and consequently the price of shells ; and in addition to these 
benefits the Maryland oyster culture laws furnish every oppor- 
tunity for the individual 03'stermau to become an oyster planter. 

18. In 1908 Maryland produced two and one-fifth times as 
many bushels of oysters as New York, yet in the same year 
New York received fourteen per cent, more money for her 
oysters than did Maryland. 



39 

19. The people of the whole State of Maryland are now 
paying the oyster police officials of Maryland nearly fifty thou- 
sand dollars each year for the purpose of protecting the ancient 
privileges of oysterruen to state-owned oyster properties that 
experts say will some day pa} - a net income of ten per cent, on 
over one hundred million of dollars ; and this, too, in the face 
of the fact that these properties have been so depleted by these 
same oystermen that they do not now pay the oystermen more 
than ten per cent, on twenty million of dollars. 

20. The last edition of the Encyclopedia Britanica states 
that not over seven per cent, of all European oysters are gath- 
ered from natural oyster bars. 

21. Nature only provided Connecticut with one thirty-sev- 
enth of the area of natural oyster bars she gave to Maryland, 
and yet in 1908 through cultivation of her oyster resources, the 
value of the oysters sold by Connecticut was fourteen per cent, 
greater than the value of oysters sold the same year by 
Maryland. 

22. A report of the U. S. Census Bureau states that in 1908 
the leased areas of Virginia contributed fifty-seven per cent, of 
the value of all her oysters. 

23. Oystermen of other states have managed their oyster 
resources so as to increase the total production of the United 
States by about ten million of bushels during the last twenty- 
five years while Maryland's oystermen during the same period 
have so managed their oyster resources as to decrease the pro- 
duction of oysters in Maryland bj" the same ten million of 
bushels of oysters ; and the question is, who lost and who 
gained the money paid for those ten million bushels? 

24. In the small State of Rhode Island, the net oyster rev- 
enue received from 19,000 acres of leased bottoms formerly 
barren of oysters is over one hundred thousand dollars each 
year. 



40 

25. Kellogg says in liis book on Shell Fish Industries : 
"Our attention is often called in a deprecating manner to the 
enthusiastic admiration of many Americans for big tilings 
possessed by their country." "But possibly it will do no 
harm to make the statement for the benefit of such enthusias- 
tic Americans, that nowhere do oysters grow so rapidly, 
nowhere are they so abundant, nowhere may they be so easily 
cultivated, and nowhere is the oyster area of such vast extent 
as on our shores." "In truth, here is very much the largest 
thing of its kind in the world." 

26. Kellogg says in his book on Shell Fisli Industries : 
"Of late years it has everywhere become the habit to refer to 
the upper Chesapeake as the dead goose that laid golden eggs. 
When modern oyster laws are being demanded in other states, 
Maryland is exhibited as the horrible example of faulty legis- 
lation on the oyster industry." 

"An American from any other part of the country knows 
without being told that such a state of affairs is probably to be 
explained by what is the fact in this case — that the Maryland 
oyster is deeply involved in politics." 

27. In Maryland the State and Federal governments com- 
bined have made over one hundred and eighty thousand sound- 
ings and chain readings covering a distance of over three thou- 
sand miles ; have examined the oysters on the bottom at eleven 
thousand oyster investigation stations ; and have permanently 
secured the location of this information by establishing eleven 
hundred triangulation landmarks on shore marked by monu- 
ments weighing a total of two hundred thousand pounds ; all 
for the purpose of determining and defining for all time the 
boundaries of the more than two hundred thousand acres of 
natural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by 
the terms of the Hainan Oyster Culture Law. 



41 

28. During the fifteen years of 1873 to 1888 nature gave the 
oysterrnen of Maryland an average of twelve million bushels of 
oysters for each of these fifteen years, and yet in the face of 
this fifteen years' demonstration of the capacity of the waters of 
Maryland to produce oysters, nature only gave the oystermen of 
Maryland some three and a-half million of bushels of oysters 
in the season of 1910-11. 

29. The United States Census Bureau states that " the value 
of the oyster products of Maryland decreased twenty-three per 
cent, during the eleven years from 1897 to 1908, which con_ 
trasts sharply with an increase of forty-seven per cent, in the 
aggregate value of all other fishery products in that State dur- 
ing the same period." 

30. The State of Maryland now expends thousands of dol- 
lars each year to keep oyster dredgers from robbing the 03-ster 
tongers, and to keep both the tougers and dredgers fiom rob- 
bing themselves by taking half-grown oysters. 

31. If any one oyster planter in Maryland should lease the 
maximum of five hundred acres permitted by the Hainan Oys- 
ter Culture Law as amended by the Campbell-Price Bill, and if 
this five hundred acres was made to produce the average amount 
of oysters taken from a similar area of Maryland's natural oyster 
bars, this oyster planter would only increase the output of 
oysters in Maryland by one four-hundredth part. 

Or stating it more broadly and accurately this oyster planter 
under the conditions described would only increase the total 
output of oysters in the United States by one part in four 
thousand. 

This indicates very clearly that neither a monopoly or a glut 
in oysters is likely to result from oyster planting under the 
rigid restrictions provided by the Hainan Law as it is pro- 
posed to amend it by the Campbell-Price Bill. 



42 

32. Section 110 of the amended Human Oyster Culture Law 
says: "No assignment or transfer of any interest acquired by 
this Act shall be valid for any purpose if made to a non-resi- 
dent of this State." 

33. Section 110 of tbe amended Hainan Oyster Culture Law- 
says : "If any assignment of any interest created by this Act 
is attempted to be made to any corporation or joint stock com- 
pany, all the interest of the grantor or assignor shall revert to 
the State as if no lease had ever been made." 

34. Section 110 of the amended Haman Oyster Culture Law 
says : "If any assignment of any interest created bj' this Act 
is attempted to be made to any person in such a way that tin- 
assignee shall become the holder of more than thirty acres, one 
hundred acres, or five hundred acres as the case may be, 
according to the location of the land leased under this Act, 
all interest of the grantor or assignor, in case of such assign- 
ment, shall revert to the State as if no lease had been made." 

35. In Maryland it is said that if oyster culture is not a 
theory that it will cause an over production of oysters which 
will reduce their price, and that it is not more oysters that are 
needed in Maryland but higher prices ; yet it is estimated that 
in the season of 1910-11, Maryland only supplied one-tenth of 
all the oysters produced in the United States, and it is known 
that Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and 
Delaware have through oyster culture methods increased both 
the cpuantity and price of their oysters ; while ou the other 
hand during the same period Maryland has greatly decreased 
both the quantity and the price of her oysters. 

36. The real answers to the statement that "an increase iu 
the production of oysters in Maryland will mean a loss to the 
oyster industries of the State by reason of low prices due to a. 
'glut ' of oysters," are as follows : 



43 

1st. Oyster culture is the only method by which a periodical 
" glut " of oysters can be prevented. This fact is borne out 
by the history of oyster culture in all real oyster culture states. 
On reflection the reasons for this truth are man}-. One of them 
is the fact that the storage of marketable oysters on private 
oyster plantations is automatically increased through self-inter- 
est of the oyster planters when the prices of oysters are low, 
and likewise for similar reasons the quantity of marketable 
oysters on private oyster beds is decreased when the prices are 
high, thus maintaining a steady supply and the best market 
prices such as are paid for oysters in Connecticut, Rhode 
Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware. 

2nd. Another reason is that the demand for oyster and other 
tish foods of all sorts is increasing throughout the world by 
reason of growth of population and better facilities of trans- 
portation while the production of oysters in Maryhind is 
decreasing; and incidentally in this connection it should be 
noted that other oyster culture states, unlike Maryland, believe 
that they can make more money by supplying this demand 
than they can by raising prices through restricting the produc- 
tion. 

3rd. In fact, when it is remembered that Maryland only pro- 
duces one-tenth of all the oysters of the United States, which 
oysters are of even less relative value, any attempt of Maryland 
to increase prices through monopoly of oysters is not only a 
hopeless undertaking but is also a policy that means an annual 
net loss to the industries of Maryland of one to three millions 
dollars each year. 

37. It is stated that 500 acres of bottoms in the exposed 
open waters of Chesapeake Bay is too great for any one man to 
lease for purposes of oyster culture because it would mean a 
monopoly. Yet it is a fact that )/ one firm in Maryland should 



44 

happen to own only one per cent, of all the dredging bonis of Mary- 
land that this one firm would receive an amount of oysters from 
the free public natural oyster bars of Maryland equivalent to 
the production of 500 to 1,000 acres of these natural oyster 
bars. 

No one who is familiar with the existing conditions dominat- 
ing the oyster controversy iu Maryland can doubt, that if one 
firm does not now own or control five to ten per cent, of the 
dredging boats of Maryland, that such a firm is likely to 
become a reality in the near future, and it ought to be known 
that such ownership or control of ten per cent, of the dredge 
boats of Maryland would mean that these owners would 
receive a quantity of oj T sters from the free public natural 
oyster bars of Maryland equivalent to the average production 
of 5,000 to 10,000 acres of natural oyster bars of a far better 
character than can be leased by an oyster planter. 

However, even the control of the product of 10,000 acres of 
natural oyster bars would not constitute a dredging monopoly, 
because this would only mean that this assumed firm of oyster 
packers or dredgers owning the assumed dredging boats con- 
trolled something less than one-twenty-fifth of the production 
of oysters in Maryland, and that would mean in the final 
analysis that this one firm would only control one two hun- 
dred and fiftieth part of the total oyster production of the 
United States. 

If the preceding statement of what may happen in Maryland 
under existing conditions of the oyster industry of that State, 
is contrasted with the fact that in; oyster planter in Maryland 
is permitted by the Campbell-Price Bill to lease an area which 
will produce more than one four-thousandth part of the pro- 
duction of 03'sters in the United States, it becomes evident that 
there need be no fear of an oyster planter monopolist who is 
confined to 500 acres of barren bottom, which he must cover 
with shells, must plant with seed oysters, must cultivate, must 
protect against thieves, and for which he must pay the State 
an annual rent of $500. 



45 

38. The history of the rise and fall of the production of 
oysters in Maryland is most instructive in showing the hope- 
lessness of expecting that unaided nature will again restore 
Maryland to its rank as the greatest oyster state of the 
country. 

Commencing with 1850, we find the quantity of oysters pro- 
duced in that year was about 1,000,000 bushels ; twenty years 
later in 1870 it was 10,000,000 bushels; in another five years 
in 1875 it reached 14,000,000 bushels ; and in the year 1885 
its marvelous growth attained its highest point of 15,000,000 
bushels. 

From 1885 to 1888, the production of oysters in Maryland 
declined to 10,000,000 bushels, the last date marking the end 
of a fifteen year period in which the natural oyster bars 
yielded to the oystermen of Maryland an average of 12,000,000 
bushels a year. In 1897 the quantity of oysters produced by 
Maryland was something less than 6,000,000 bushels, and in 
1910-11 it is conservatively estimated that the natural oyster 
bars of Maryland only yielded 4,000,000 bushels. 

Accepting the figures as stated, the decline of Maryland's 
oyster industries since 1885 is represented at this date by a 
loss of 10,000,000 bushels of oysters each year. 

The statistics from which the preceding facts were obtained 
are the best that are available ami there is no more reason to 
suppose that the actual decline in the production of oysters in 
Maryland, u-as less than has been stated than there is reason to 
assume that it was greater. But nevertheless, assuming that the 
figures of 15,000,000 in 1885 were too great by twenty-five per 
cent., and we still have nearly 12,000,000 bushels which is the 
same as the average given for the fifteen consecutive years of 
1873 to 1888. And also assuming that the figure for 1910-11 
is twenty-five per cent, in error, but in the opposite direction, 



46 

which is giving the "doubter" twenty-five per oi nt. leeway in 
his favor at both ends of the argument, and we still have only 
5,000,000 bushels for the quantity of oysters now produced in 

Maryland. 

These figures and facts speak for themselves, and it is only 
saying what is obvious, when we slate that the 215,852 acres 
of natural oyster bars of Maryland should be looked after, not 
only in some manner different from that which has bi i □ 
applied in recent years but that also they should be restored to. 
their former productivity of 12,000,000 bushels a year which 
we know they can and will yield under practical laws of conser- 
vation and restoration such as is provided by the " /'■ 
Oyster Plan," 

39. The Maryland Oyster Survey has cost the State and 
Federal governments combined more than two hundred thou- 
sand dollars. 

This survey is now completed and the expenses of the work 
will have entirely ceased by June 30th of this year. 

From now on the cost of the administration of the Maryland 
Shell Fish Commission should not exceed §7,000 a year, an 
amount that will undoubtedly be more than covered the first 
year by revenue received from the leasing of oyster plantations. 

The second year the reveuue should be doubled, and within 
ten years there is no reason to suppose that it will be less than 
$100,000 annually and constantly growing larger. Provided 
that the amendments to the Haman Oyster Culture Lair ,,/' V.mr, 
contained in the Campbell-Price Bill are enacted by tin General 
Assembly of Maryland. 



47 



EXTRACTS FROM PRINTED INTERVIEWS OR PUBLIC 
ADDRESSES OF GOVERNOR GOLDSBOROUGH, 
SENATOR PRICE, SENATOR CAMPBELL, 
SENATOR GOSLIN, SENATOR MIL- 
BOURNE, AND A REPRINT OF A 
CLIPPING FROM THE EASTON 
STAR-DEMOCRAT. 



Extract From Address of Governor Goldsborough Before 
a Coneerence of Those Interested in the Oyster Indus- 
try Called by Him to Meet at Annapolis on February 
2, 1912. 

(From Hi" Baltimore NEWS of Feb. 2. 1012). 
Governor Goldsborough opened the meeting with a short 
address, in which he said that the oyster industry in Maryland 
vvus languishing and thai something should be done to improve 
conditions. As be came from an oyster-producing county, 
whatever measure of su icess he bad met with was due to the 
oystermen, and therefore their welfare was dear to his heart. 

Favobs Oyster Cclti-re. 

lie said the needs of the tongers and the dredgers were the 
greatest and should lie looked alter by the State. lit declared 
that he thought oyster culture desirable, but that it should not 
In- accomplished al the expense of the men who for genera- 
tions have earned their livelihood on the water. 

Me thought that the interests of those engaged in the various 
branches of the industry ought not to clash. 

The Governor expressed the view that if any revenue is 
derived from the leasing of the barren bottoms not more than 
half should go to the roads, as is now provided, but that 
half should be devoted tu a system of replenishing the natural 
beds and bars. He thought it wise to put the shells on the bars 
to improve the quality and the quantity of the product. He 
declared the oyster question the greatest problem now before 
the people of the State. 



48 



The "Pkice Oystek Plan" as Developed by an Inter- 
view with Senator Price. 

(From the Baltimore SUN of Jan. 31, 1912.) 
Senator Price, of Wicomico, the President of the Senate, is 
always interested in oyster legislation, representing as he does 
a large number of people engaged in taking and dealing in 

oysters. Besides this he is a Marylander and an active and 

Successful business man. and is anxious to aid in any legisla 

tion which will upbuild the state, add to its wealth and give 
profitable employment to the people. Discussing the Campbell 

Oyster Planting Bill today. Senator Price said: 

"The decreasing productiveness of tin 1 oyster bars of the 
Chesapeake and the increasing difficulty thai the oystenncn 
have in making a living warns the Legislature thai something 
must be done to revise the great oyster industry of the State. 
I am advised that the annual catch of oysters has declined from 
something like 15,000,000 bushels a year down to r!.500.00O. 
That means that a great number of people who formerly made 
their living by tonging. dredging and in the packing houses 
have been forced out of the business and have bad 1" seek other 
employment, and that those who are still engaged in taking 
oysters do not make as good a living as they formerly did. 

How Benefits Mat T'.e Shared. 

"Still a large number of our people remain in the business 
of taking oysters, and I think that tin' mistake thai has been 
made in the bills for oyster planting thai have come before the 
legislature is that the tongers and dredgers have not been 
sufficiently considered. They have felt that their rights were 
ruthlessly invaded. Perhaps they were mistaken, hut that is 
the way they have felt, and I. for one, cannot blame them. In 
my judgment it is absolutely essential to the complete success 
of the planting industry to have the assent and good will of 
the oystering people. How can this be attained? 

"By making them share in the benefits of the planting law. 
This can be done in two ways: 

"First, by applying at least hall' of the revenues from the 
leased bottoms to shelling the natural beds for the benefit of 
tongmen and dredgers. 

"Second, by offering every inducement to the oyslernien to 
engage in planting. This latter 1 understand is contemplated 
in the Campbell bill. This hill reduces the rentals fur a number 
of years to $1 an acre per annum ami gives oystermen prefer- 
ence over others in leasing grounds. 



49 



Would Make Babs Pboductive. 
"It is pretty certain that, it oyster shells were liberally scat- 
tered on the natural bars as clutch, those bars would soon 
become as productive as ever. Many of the bars have been 
scraped so clean that there is nothing for the spat to catch to. 
and the result is that most of them are greatly depleted, and 
some of them are now regarded as barren bottoms. It has 
long been the desire of the oyster people to restore these bars 
to their former productiveness, but they have never been able 
to accomplish it. In 1010 a law was enacted providing for 
reshelling the natural beds, and a tax was levied upon oysters 
to provide funds. That tax was declared invalid by the courts 
and nothing could be done. 

Industry Mist Be Rescued. 

"I am advised that the members of the Shellfish Commission 
have said that they had information that from 20.000 to 40.000 
aires of barren bottoms would be leased within 18 months 
after the Campbell bill passes. This would give at the proposed 
rental of $1 an acre a revenue of from $20,000 to $40,000 a 
year. I believe that, if (he Campbell bill were amended so as 
to give half this revenue to reshelling the natural beds, it would 
reconcile the oystei'ing people to the bill by showing that their 
rights and interests are being fairly considered. As for me. 
I could not bring myself to vote for any oyster measure which 
I did not consider beneficial and lair to the oystering people. 
If the Campbell Mil can be so amended as to take care of the 
natural bars. I could fairly and freely support it. The time 
has come when the oyster industry must be rescued from 
destruction, and some one must take the bull by the horns 
and do something." 

Discussing the terms of the Campbell bill. Senator Price said 
he thought that, while the penalties put upon planters who 
would invade natural beds with their dredges are severe, 
(hoy might be [yioperly made more so by making the forfeit- 
ure "I" (be oysters a part of the penalty. The sentiment in th<! 
oystering comities, he said, is such that there would he sure 
and swift punishment for such piracy, and if the dredging 
privilege is allowed the natural beds would be safe. 



50 

Extract Fkom an Interview with Senator Campbell explain- 
ing the Main Features of the Campbell Oyster 
Culture Bill Before it was Amended in 
Accordance with the Price 
Oyster Plan. 
(From the Baltimore SUN of Jan. 17. 1912). 

Senator Campbell will tomorrow or some day soon introduce 
a carefully prepared bill amending the Hainan Oyster Law. 
This bill is designed to give effect to the recommendations 
of the Shellfish Commission. The bill fixes rentals for leased 
bottoms at .$1 per acre until April 1. 191S. After that the rent- 
als are to be $1 per aero for the first two years, and then 
increasing $1 a year annually up to $5. The bill permits 
oysters for seed to be taken during September in the Potomac, 
above Cedar Point wharf, and in Broad Creek and Harris 
Creek. Lots may be leased as large as 30 acres in waters 
within the bounds of a county and 500 acres in the open bay. 
and an individual may lease as much as 100 acres in Tangier 
Sound. The leasing of ground is restricted to residents of 
Maryland. Certain preferences are granted to riparian owners 
and oystermen. 

Reasons For The Bill. 

For years Senator Campbell has been interested in the 
oyster question, and in 1S96 he took an active part in the 
passage of the Oyster Culture Law. 

"It is my desire before I leave political life," he said yester- 
day, "to assist in putting oyster culture on a firm basis in 
Maryland. To this end I have prepared a bill which is gen- 
erally along the lines proposed by the Shellfish Commission 
in its last report. It deviates, however, in a few particulars 
from these recommendations. 

"I think non-residents ought not to be allowed to become 
lessees, and I have left this feature out of the bill. There 
is no doubt, however, that oyster farmers should have larger 
areas than they now have, and I have inserted 30 acres for 
county waters — except in Tangier Sound, where an individual 
may lease 100 acres — and in the open waters of the bay the 
amount which may be leased has been put at 500 acres. 

Extends Time Of $1 Rentals. 
"I have also extended the time for the payment of $1 per 
acre rentals to 191 S. and after that the rentals will gradually 
rise until the highest rental of ?5 per acre is reached. The 
bill provides that planters may dredge up the oysters from the 
beds, no matter where the beds arc situated. My bill also pro- 



51 

vides the penalty of a House of Correction term and the for- 
feiture of the vessel for depredations on the natural beds. 
With such a provision, and with the existing sentiment all 
through the tidewater counties, which, very properly, would be 
bitter against any person raiding the natural beds. I consider 
the oystermen would be safe. 

"Indeed. I regard the law as it now is as a kind of Magna 
Charta for the oystermen. establishing all their ancient privi- 
leges, but in its present shape it is of no use practically to the 
planters. Maryland cannot be forever behind other States in 
this matter of oyster culture. We have natural resources in 
this particular which no other State possesses, and we must 
now begin to develop them. 

Increasing Sentiment For Planting. 

"I understand from the tidewater counties that since the 
survey was made and the oystermen now know there is no 
scheme on hand to deprive them of the natural beds there is 
increasing sentiment in favor of planting. I have hedged the 
bill around so that there ran be no monopoly, and that only 
individuals of moderate means will care to go into the busi- 
ness, but 1 trust so many of them will begin business as to 
make a magnificent object lesson. 

"It has been my purpose to assist the oystermen themselves. 
Such laws in other States have benefited the oystermen greatly, 
and my public ambition will be satisfied if. at the end of my 
term of office. I have been- the means of introducing a just 
system of oyster culture under which the oystermen themselves 
can prosper. 

"I have had the aid of the views of the tidewater people 
of all classes, and I am satisfied that this bill will meet the 
views of any reasonable man who wants oyster culture in any 
form." 



An Extract From an Interview With Senator Goslin Stating 
His Position in Reference to the Campbell-Price Bill. 

(From the Baltimore SUN of Feb. 1, 19121. 

Discussing the oyster question generally this morning, Sen- 
ator Goslin, of Caroline county, said: 

"Some years ago the Legislature of Maryland passed a reso- 
lution requesting the co-operation of the United States Gov- 
ernment in making a survey of the Chesapeake Bay bottoms, 
setting apart and defining the natural beds. The stated object 
of this survey was to promote the planting industry in Mary- 
land. The Tinted States Government responded generously to 
this appeal, assigned competent and highly skilled officials to 



52 



the work and in good faith spent, t am told, more than sioo.000 
in complying with the request of the State I am Informed that 
the survey which has just been made by the Slate and Federal 
officials is one of the best ever made, and is valuable especially 
to the oystering people in definitely marking the boundaries of 
the natural beds. 1 thing thai good faith requires us to utilize 
the survey which the T'nitod States at our request helped to 
make. I voted for the bill at the last session presented by the 
Maryland Shellfish Commission because I was assured that it 
was necessary to making oyster planting a success, and I 
thought we ought for the reasons I have said to do all we 
could to promote the oyster-planting industry." 



An Extract From an Interview With Senator Milboorne 
Commenting on the Price Oyster Plan. 

(From the Baltimore SUN of Feb. 1, 10121. 

Senator Milbourne represents one of the largest oystering 
counties in the State. Perhaps Somerset contains more men 
engaged in the oystering industries than any other. He is. 
therefore, deeply interested in the oyster question and keenly 
solicitous for the interests of his oystering people. Discussing 
the subject today Senator Milbourne said : 

"I have read Senator Price's plan for shelling the natural 
bars with money coming from the rentals paid by the planters 
for leased bottoms. I think that plan is fair and will go far 
toward reconciling the oystering people to the planting system. 
Every citizen is interested in building up the wealth of the 
State; every Eastern Shoreman wants to see the oyster indus- 
try promoted. It seems to me that the bay and the rivers 
are big enough to provide places for planting without encroach- 
ing on the natural beds. The natural beds provide a living for 
a great multitude of people and they must be protected. Many 
of the beds have become depleted. They have been dredged 
clean and the clutch is all gone. More clutch should be provided 
and Senator Price's plan for spreading shells upon them seems 
to me to be a good one and if the tongmen and dredgers can be 
persuaded that their rights will be secure it will go far toward 
reconciling them to the Campbell bill. 

"The question of rentals seems to need some adjustment. A 
flat rate does not seem to me to be equitable. I know barren 
bottoms -which are well worth $10 per annum per acre and 
other bottoms that are not worth over 25 eents. a flat rate 
does not seem to be right. 

"The fact that years ago the natural beds produced 12,000,000 
bushels of oysters," the Senator continued, "and now produce 



53 

only 4,000.000 tells the story. We have the same bottoms now 
that we had then and the same food to nourish the oysters. 
Something is therefore wanting and it should be supplied. The 
Legislature should apply the remedy. I believe that shelling 
the beds is the right remedy." 



(Reprint from an article from the Easton STAR-DEMOCRAT 
of February 10, 1012). 

COMPLIED WITH TALBOT VIEWS. 

The Campbell Oyster Bill Was Reintroduced Because of Pro- 
tests From This County. 



The oyster bill introduced by Senator Campbell last week has 
been withdrawn and a new bill presented, owing to the vigorous 
protests made by Senator Dodson for the oyster interests of 
the county. 

This new bill embodies the plan to devote one-half the rentals 
of the oyster bottoms to shelling the natural oyster beds and 
save them from depletion. It omits the section of the Camp- 
bell bill setting aside certain areas from which seed oysters 
might be taken, because of the objection to that provision by 
the oystering people of Talbot county. 

The provisions giving planters the right to take oysters from 
their planted beds with dredges lias been greatly modified 
so as to protect absolutely under heavy penalties the natural 
liars from depredation by the planters. Added to the penalty 
of imprisonment in the House of Correction, contained in the 
former bill, the new bill provides for imprisonment and for- 
feiture of the dredge boat used. 

The Senators from the oyster counties will welcome an oyster 
bill that will be acceptable to their constituents and which will 
end the ion- contention in the Legislature over planting laws. 
Senators Dodson. Milbourne, Reek. Bosley and Harper are 
the ones chiefly concerned. They will give the new oyster bill 
careful scrutiny before deciding what to do about it. All of 
thorn appreciate the efforts that have been made to meet their 
Views and to satisfy the demands of their constituents. Per- 
sons familiar with the subject anticipate a bad session for 
Hi,' oystermen next year, because of the heavy ice on the flats 
during extremely low tides, when many bars are exposed. 

Oyster county people are much concerned about the low price 
for oysters received by tongers and dredgers. They declare 
that at the extravagant prices the consumers in Baltimore 
and elsewhere Have to pay the oystermen they ought to get 
more than they do. The Senators are talking about some plan 
for better marketing. 



LBJe'12 



